baldursgatefandomcom-20200223-history
User talk:YoDsanklai
Welcome Hi, welcome to ! Probably nobody has yet looked at your edit to the Thieves' Guild page, but someone will. Please leave a message on my talk page if I can help with anything! Tommy2215 (talk) 16:36, April 25, 2016 (UTC) Re: Reverted edit Hello, YoDsanklai. Sorry for taking so long to respond, but you're right about that info not belonging in the Locations section. While it's not necessarily subjective, it probably isn't written well enough to show that, either. I'll take care of it in the morning. - Erik the Mad (talk) 10:49, May 10, 2016 (UTC) red link tagging Howdy! I shall cease and stop on the articles with red link tagging! have a good day! --WindOfTheUnwrittenLaw (talk) 18:54, May 17, 2016 (UTC) Re: Template:Pagename nd You may not be eager to to remove the template from a mere 50 or so pages (now considerably more since yesterday, no less), but I am certainly not eager to add it to several hundred. The template is unnecessary and doesn't work on certain pages, anyway, due to different versions of a character, item, etc. appearing in multiple titles in the series. As for why I changed certain parts of your edits, I thought that would have been clear in the edit summary. I was conforming these edits to the standard design on this wiki that has persisted (and worked just fine) for years, as we do not have an 'Appearances' section due to it being redundant, since proper articles list all appearances of certain features in both the infobox and under relevant headers, such as 'Locations' in the case of items. Lastly, there is something serious I would like to bring up. You have been flooding the wiki with so much content in such a short time that it has become quite disruptive. An average of one new article every two minutes while you are active has added up to somewhere around two-hundred in less than a month, most of which practically blank compared to others, not to mention the improper adherence to the wiki's style, incomplete though it may be (I'm still working on filling that out). You can look to pre-existing, well-made pages for examples, but it's a nightmare to sort through them all and make corrections where necessary. Normally, I wouldn't do this but, seeing as how it has already gone much too far, consider this your only warning: slow down with the almost out-of-control editing and try too focus on improving the largely bare-bones pages that you have already added. Such prolific contributing makes it easy for vandalism and poor edits by new, inexperienced users to slip through and potentially go unnoticed for months, even years. Just take it easy for a while Even since I started writing this, you have created three new pages, and it's really getting out of hand. - Erik the Mad (talk) 15:16, May 18, 2016 (UTC) :Not only have you failed to heed the warning, but you have started adding arbitrary category pages. This is rather contraditory, given how you have mentioned several times that you think the categories are 'cluttered.' Sorry, but it's time for a break. - Erik the Mad (talk) 02:12, May 19, 2016 (UTC) ← My bad, I didn't see the "You have message" pop-up until I went to another wiki and stopped editing after. My point of view of the wiki is that we/you need to set up a standard for creating new pages so we can stop having pages like those :Ghlouralk, Mass Healing and White Dragon Plate created by new/unregistered/unexperimented users. I am talking about using the admin tools to propose several template pages each time someone creates a new page. Example: what we could have when creating a new page, what we currently have I added the "Appearances" section on some pages to stop having pages like this one where the first paragraph contains informations about the characteristics of the weapon, the games it appears in and the location of the weapon. It's quicker to read and also to insert the correct informations if this kind of paragraph is split up in 3 that all have their function. I admit I created a lot of pages and linked those together so that visitors can navigate through those pages, read the information they need and complete the holes with the information they have. I did this because it's easier for an unexperienced visitor to complete the holes than to directly create a page from scratch. I understand your point of view and your interest to protect the wiki. I also understand you are reluctant to change a lot of old pages because it is a huge task. Although in its current state the wiki counts probably less than half the areas and characters it could, probably 3/4 of the side quests, most of the weapons and armors but a quarte of the quest items and scrolls. There's still a lot of work to do just on BG1, BG1TOSC, BG1EE, BG2, BG2TOB, BG2EE and then there will be Dragonspear. Defining the rules is tedious but it needs to be done and there are still people in this community that can help to do it. It is not a work you have to do alone. The categories also need some rework. We currently have 218 orphaned pages on the wiki over the 2804 total pages : that's close to 10% of the pages that only can be accessed through the research tool or through categories. We also have a lot of pages wrongly categorized and we cannot correct the errors by using this kind of category page. There's post on the forum if you want to talk about this issue or just state that you prefer the things in their current state. Additionnal suggestions: * Different templates for creatures and characters are needed. That would help to differentiate pages like Entar Silvershield and Vampires. * Setting a norm on how to treat upgradable weapons. Example: The Flail of Ages has 3 different pages (Flail of Ages, Flail of Ages +3, Flail of Ages +5) while Carsomyr has one. * Using the Basilisk page as an example or a stepping stone to treat the creatures and their subspecies instead of dealing with several pages like Spiders, Giant Spider, Small Spider, Mutated Spider... * Rework the distinction between areas and buildings since they all are treated as the same by the game but only one type is accessible from the world map. Maybe use the same infobox for both but add a field to say if the location is accessible from the world map and another field to list the locations it connects to. * Explaining in this wiki's policy page what are the templates to follow when creating new pages or editing derelict pages. If there is no quality standard it seems odd to ask people to follow that undefined quality standard and it is even harder for the concerned people to follow it. Sorry for the grammar, I'm not a native speaker. --YoDsanklai (talk) 14:27, May 19, 2016 (UTC)